Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Ram Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested vide FIR No. 208 of 2024, dated 2.9.2024, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 75, 78, 64(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nayaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). The petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. The victim filed an affidavit before the police on 27.3.2024 stating that the petitioner used to harass her on Facebook Messenger. She was assured by the petitioner not to do so, hence, she wanted to withdraw the complaint filed by her. Subsequently, she filed the present FIR. The petitioner and victim are married and the petitioner could not have entered into a physical relationship with the victim on the pretext of marriage. The petitioner is aged 39 years. His family is dependent upon him. The investigation is complete and no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. Hence, the petition.
2. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the victim came out of her home on 1.9.2024 at about 11.00 PM. The petitioner had concealed himself in the
The court emphasized that bail should be granted when there is insufficient evidence to substantiate serious allegations, and the accused's rights must be balanced with the need for justice.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted based on the accused's community ties and the nature of the allegations, not solely on the seriousness of the charges.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted based on the nature of accusations, the gravity of the offence, and the risk of witness tampering, while ensuring conditions facilitate justice.
The court emphasized that bail should not be denied without substantial evidence of interference with justice, allowing conditions to safeguard the process.
The court emphasized that bail should be denied in serious offences like abetting rape, considering the gravity of the crime and potential influence on the victim.
The court emphasized that insufficient evidence and the nature of the accusations justified granting bail, with conditions to ensure the accused's presence during trial.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted based on the credibility of allegations and the necessity to prevent witness tampering, establishing stringent conditions for the accused.
The court ruled that bail should be denied in cases involving serious charges like murder, especially when there is substantial evidence against the accused.
The court emphasized that in serious criminal cases, particularly involving sexual offences, the gravity of the allegations and potential witness tampering are critical factors in bail considerations....
The court emphasized that bail should be denied in serious criminal cases where there is a risk of witness intimidation and ongoing prosecution, as established in relevant Supreme Court precedents.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
